Expansion announced!

[Comm Cody]

Fix expeditionary forces, so that when you demand them back, the conutry that controls it will get it to your land by any means possible! Oh and no more expeditonary force spam!

If you are a Goverment in Exile and you build a unit in frendly territory, why does it revert to owner of that terrtory and not your control? Ex: Cezchslovakia goes into exile in Britian, Cezchslovakia builds a binary infantry division, why does the U.K take it over? Shouldn't Cezchslovakia keep it? Or if i fly a air unit to Britian and my goverment fails, shouldn't i keep control of my unit?

If this is in SF, I'm sorry, but I have 1.4, but If this makes it into For the Motherland, I will gladly buy both just to get rid of these two annoying problems!

 

[comsubpac]

Fix expeditionary forces, so that when you demand them back, the conutry that controls it will get it to your land by any means possible! Oh and no more expeditonary force spam!

the expeditionary forces problem is solved in semper fi.

If you are a Goverment in Exile and you build a unit in frendly territory, why does it revert to owner of that terrtory and not your control? Ex: Cezchslovakia goes into exile in Britian, Cezchslovakia builds a binary infantry division, why does the U.K take it over? Shouldn't Cezchslovakia keep it? Or if i fly a air unit to Britian and my goverment fails, shouldn't i keep control of my unit?

not really, as far as i know that happened IRL as well, the remaining polish navy was integrated in the royal navy. i am not sure about newly build units but playing a GiE is pretty useless in singleplayer.

If this is in SF, I'm sorry, but I have 1.4, but If this makes it into For the Motherland, I will gladly buy both just to get rid of these two annoying problems!

most of this is fixed in semper fi and yes you will need semper fi for the next expansion.

 

[Comm Cody]

Thank you.

 

[Taijian]

Can we PLEASE, PLEASE get a new feature in the expansion so that the building of reinforcements and upgrades to existing divisions/aircrafts also gives practical? That would IMHO be the single most important improvement to gameplay, because it would prevent the absurd late game decline in practicals after new divisions are no longer being build.

 

[unmerged(14719)]

You message inspired me and I tried to change the localisation files. Actually we can have something like that.

LANDBATTLEOVER_LOG;We $RESULT$ the $NAME$.\n(our losses: $USLOSS$/$USNUM$ enemy losses: $THEIRLOST$/$THEIRNUM$)

I still have to figure how to make this eye candy but we don't need an expension for that.

That's pretty awesome. Would love to see these statistics. Be even better if you could incorporate it as 'estimated' enemy losses. While the accuracy for your losses are more accurate, losses for the enemy should be a function of land intel, decryption techs and terrain.

Would be also great to have 'prisoners captured' as well. I always found it 'X-fileish' that entire armies (after taking losses) go poof during an encirclement.

 

[Cybvep]

That's pretty awesome. Would love to see these statistics. Be even better if you could incorporate it as 'estimated' enemy losses. While the accuracy for your losses are more accurate, losses for the enemy should be a function of land intel, decryption techs and terrain.

That's impossible to implement ATM.

 

[Kraxis]

That's impossible to implement ATM.

You mean due to the stance on the entire PoW issue? I thought that stemmed from the unpleasantness of bad treatment and internment camps etc. Btw those things certainly don't belong in a pasttime for fun.
However I can easily see the game count up the number of factional troops that surrender (vanish), and then make a counter. Should the nation that lost these ever capture the capital of it's opponent (to make it a sufficiently hard goal) it will get those prisoners back as Manpower (some specific percentage of course, can't think it is worth it to handle elites and militia different to each other).

 

[fabius]

Any land and air loss stats would be appreciated.
Comparisons of division/ brigade losses as a minimum for, well a comparison.

Good grief, it's a war game- at least let modders be able to mod some obviously critical stats.

 

[Stauffenberg13]

Thank you for this!!!

But... Please, please, please, for the love of all that is good in this world, have someone pick up a halfway decent world atlas and FIX THE MAP this time. There are just too many terrible errors, still around today, that should never have been there in the first place when the game was first released a year and a half ago.

 

[jamhaw]

excellent ideas brom. On number (1) I dont think the relationship between brittain and her dominions in 1936 has ever been depicted in a way thats historically correct we were very loyal to britain in those days it was closer than an alliance but not a puppet relationship. Canada ,Australia, South Africa and New Zealand all supplied trained men for the RAF and Royal Navy. Much of our equipment was purchased, licenced or given to us by Britain and to not support her in war would have been thought of as a terrible betrayal. New Zealands most famous general (freyberg) was born in england brought up in NZ served in the british army during WW1 but was transfered to the NZ army to lead the NZEF in Sicily, Africa and Italy maybe it would make a good focus for the next expansion if they cant get it in this one

Yes I really hope that they fix this, the only dominion which did not join Britain in the war was Ireland and arguable the only reason that they did not was because Valera had been able able to take advantage of Edward VIII's abdication to abolish the post of Govenor General (it would be nice to have the option of Edward not abdicating and this insuring that the Irish Free State was more tightly bound with the rest of the Empire).

 

[Justus2]

One simple fix I would like to see (which we had in HOI2) is showing unit experience in the ledger for unit stats. I can sort by experience for leaders, but if I want to find my 'elite' veteran units, I have to click around the map, I can't see who's gaining the most experience.

I would agree with limits for promotions as well, although it's not a big deal, I usually enforce some type of limit on myself. But as it is, rank is pretty meaningless, you can add/subtract stars at will to make the leaders be the level you want.

 

[Buh the Ghost]

There is just one thing, one single thing I'd really like to see:

Multiple province select by drawing a frame around them, just like you did with the theaters and their area of command. It just costs so much time to select many provinces click by click. This shouldn't be hard to implement, should it?

So PLEASE do it



EDIT:

Well... to be honest, there is a second thing I'd like to see:

Let me filter the leaders in the leader tab. For example, if I want to change the leader of my new tank division, I just want to see the leaders with a combined arms trait.

Make it simple and without extra menus. Just add a small symbol for each trait and skill (and I mean skill) level in the leader tab, for example on the very top right side. You can enable/disable all, normal settings is everything enabled. Don't forget, that you need a "no trait" symbol, too.
The trait settings you enable are OR connected, not AND. (so if you select everything, every commander will be shown.) Of course, the skill level settings are OR connected, too, but the skill level settings are AND connected to the trait settings.

Example: You disable all symbols but skill level 2 and combined arms trait. Then you just see commanders, who are skill level 2 and have at least the combined arms trait, they may have more, too.

A little bit highlighted there should be a "set to standart" button. This just costs some pixels of space and has everything you need.

It is important, that the filter settings are remembered because normally you get more than just one division of the same type, which needs the same type of leader.

Final request: Add a button to remove all leaders from all divisions and HQs It will help setting up the starting OOB. please

Both changes will save so much time...

 

[SAS]

The only thing I am a little wary about is the "increased pace" I am interested to heard this explained.

 

[PaxImperator]

Very well. Johan on page 3:

Its a reference to battle scenarios.

 

[Iwin123]

the T2300 is a Core 2 duo 1666Mhz cpu.. slow?? I left my gaming rig in Europe, which consisted of a Pentium D 3.0Ghz. The game ran fine on that. Lots of modern day cpus run on a slower speed but just have more instructions which make them comparatively fast to older cpus.


WANT (updated):

- Supply depots! I hate it that the ONE thing in the game that you have no control over, actually breaks it. Sure, in WW2 supply was bad at times, but it was bad because of need for catching up, weather, enemy breakthroughs etc. It wasn't bad because the people in Logistics were idiots (like the AI).

- Working production sliders. When I put 250 IC in Upgrade, I want it to STAY 250. Any extra or lost IC can go in the category that DOESN'T HAVE ITS SLIDER LOCKED. How hard can that be to code? As it is, I spent waaaay to much time adjusting them and hoping that they'll stay in place.

- Capturing ships in port, if you blockade the harbor. Also give Germany some ships in the Med in the scenarios, or give me...

- Control over my allies! Ask them for Exp. Forces, whatever they are, ships (transport ships!!) or units or aircraft.

OK I hope you are being sarcastic, but if not:

Calculations per second isn't everything (and even then, 1,6 ghz is very little). Your CPU us ancient. it has no serious cahce memory even.

Oh, and your "gaming" PC is pretty old as well. You can't expect to play any modern game on computers (that were mediocre even then) from 2005

 

[unmerged(89129)]

give the player control over the supply network.

 

[Marcus]

Excellent news boys and girls, I will have another bottle of vodka ready when I have this puppy on my harddrive.

How did the last one work out by the way?

 

[Phönix]

give the player control over the supply network.

or better yet give us the option to build "supply bases". It could be a landbuilding that you can build in a province. One such could store up to 1.000 supply and fule. 10 (max) couls strope 10k and 10k fuel. This would also make the cap of 99k more flexible, as small contries would have much less capabilites and bigger countries could make more. But they should not be too cheap, so that noone can strope 1000k before the war or anything. Indeed germany and Britan could strat with like 50k and you would build them as needed, (if needed). This would also make the logistical bombing of the capital less of a problem, as you would also have supplies elsewhere.

 

[laskuna]

Add correct Vistula estulary!!!

 

[Hraban]

Excellent ideas Owsik !